Note, I said "duty".
Friends should [offer fraternal correction], but only if it is likely that the person being admonished will actually heed it.

The distinction between duty and "a good thing we should do" is not relevant here because you criticized aTradionalist's analogy:

Quote:

Love is not a fix all. It's love that compels us to preach, teach and convert. We can judge right from wrong. We do not condemn. That's the Lords business. This is modernist garbage and false ecumenism. Would you let your children go wild and do whatever they wanted? You would just love them into submission? If I was wallowing in mortal sin, I would hope that someone actually loved me enough to correct me and save me from damnation. Love means doing and saying the hard things sometimes. Your philosophy would have us holding their hands on the road to hell. If people get offended then so be it. Our Lord did not bring peace but a sword.

on the grounds that "only some people in certain relationships have a duty to practice fraternal correction (parents to children, teachers to students, priests to the flock, etc." But aTraditionalist was not appealing to duty as much as to a sense of "a good thing to do". So if you are going to speak only of what duty demands, you are not weakening aTraditionalist's analogy. It does not "fall flat" as you say, when you consider that strict duty was not the issue in the first place. It was, as the title of the thread says, "How should we receive those in the gay and lesbian community". The topic was not "What strict duty do we have toward gays and lesbians".

The distinction between duty and "a good thing we should do" is not relevant here because you criticized aTradionalist's analogy:

on the grounds that "only some people in certain relationships have a duty to practice fraternal correction (parents to children, teachers to students, priests to the flock, etc." But aTraditionalist was not appealing to duty as much as to a sense of "a good thing to do". So if you are going to speak only of what duty demands, you are not weakening aTraditionalist's analogy. It does not "fall flat" as you say, when you consider that strict duty was not the issue in the first place. It was, as the title of the thread says, "How should we receive those in the gay and lesbian community". The topic was not "What strict duty do we have toward gays and lesbians".

It is not good to do it in such a way that it hardens hearts and drives them further from God. That is what so many Christians wind up doing out of incompetence.

We should receive them like anyone else. I am not going to assume what anyone who attends church is doing in their private lives. How do you know for certain that someone who 'appears' gay, really is? How can you possibly know whether or not they have an active lifestyle just by looking at them? You don't.

I am still in RCIA and not in full communion with the church yet. I'm certain that there are many gays and lesbians attending mass and in full communion because they have decided to live in chastity.

Now, if someone brings up the issue of same sex marriage, that's when the church's position should be explained in a gentle, loving way. I had a very difficult conversation with my aunt (I have a cousin who is gay). I expiained the church's position and what is expected of people who are gay, but I also explained how the church has empathy for people who are struggling with homosexuality and that there is no room for hate. At the end of the conversation, she said that she respects the church's position, even if she doesn't agree with it.

If someone is gay, that is a heck of a cross to bear. No need for us to make it any heavier.

I think the answer would be the same if the question were about an adulterous relationship, and would be patterned to what Jesus did with the woman caught in adultery. (John 8:1-11)

Jesus accepted the woman with love and forgiveness, but still firmly warned her: "Go, and sin no more."

Like adultery, homosexual relationships are sinful and are contrary to what God had in mind about marriage when he created the two sexes. (Mt 19:4-5)

So, yes, continue to love that person involved in a homosexual relationship. Do not bully him or treat him unjustly. Treat him with charity. However, do not condone the sin. Do not approve of it. It is precisely because of love that you wouldn't want that person to persist in wrongdoing.

^^^ I think this is right on point and I like the comparison with adultery as I think it should go the same way. Remember love the sinner reject the sin. Treat them exactly how you would do to someone you appreciate dearly but found out he is being adulterous. Don't condone the sin but treat them with respect.